Politicians create a task force to study the problem, to make it look as if they intend to take action, which they do not.

Senator Feinstein will introduce legislation for a ban on assault weapons, which may or may not pass in the Senate. If it does pass in the Senate, it will surely be struck down in the House of Representatives. End of story, again...

My stance on gun control ?

---Make gun ownership a privilege, not a right, similar to a drivers license---Much more extensive background checks for people applying for a gun permit, and/or purchasing a gun---Only allow guns that hold no more than 2 bullets---Mandatory trigger locks---Mandatory that guns be locked away in a steel cabinet---Mandatory that ammo be locked away in a separate steel cabinet

As an NRA Member who doesn't own more than one gun, I still think that we can have a reasonable restriction on the ownership of AR-15, AK-47, etc. More stringent requirements for ownership, registering them with the FBI are ideas that most people would support.

Typical hand guns (with limited magazines) and rifles should not be included in this argument.

The idea of permanent gun locks and mandatory ammo stored in a differnt cabinet are designed to make sure the gun owner is powerless in a confrontation. Now, if you have young children in or visiting your home, it's incumbent on YOU to keep the weapons safe from them and you should be held liable if you don't just like if you keep the drain cleaner or liquor where they can get into it and harm themselves.

Firearm Ownership is Mandatory for All Households in Kennesaw, Georgia25 Years Later, "Gun Town USA" Continues to Maintains Exceptionally Low Crime Stats

Do you know that if you live in the small town of Kennesaw, Georgia, you are required to have and maintain a firearm?

On May 1, 1982, a new ordinance was passed by the city council of Kennesaw. This law ( Sec. 34-1 Heads of households to maintain firearms) made it mandatory for each household to own and maintain a gun, as well as ammunition. Not only was the ordinance passed by city council, it was a unanimous decision. The ordinance states the gun law is needed "In order to provide for the emergency management of the City, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the City limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore." Of course, exclusions were made to convicted felons, people with religious objections, and people with disabilities.

Members of the city council introduced and voted for the ordinance to make a statement when a city in Illinois, Morton Grove, passed an ordinance banning hand guns from anyone other than peace officers. Morton Grove was the first community to ever ban the sale and possession of handguns.

Both city ordinances drew worldwide media attention, with Kennesaw's attention being negative. Nicknamed "Gun Town USA" from a column titled the same and written by Art Buchwald, expectations were for the town to covert back to the Old West style of handling disagreements with ruthless shoot outs. This expectation never happened. In fact, more than 25 years after the ban, not a single resident of Kennesaw has been involved in a fatal shooting - as a victim, attacker or defender. There has been one firearm related murder but not from a resident of Kennesaw. Since the ordinance, no child has ever been injured with a firearm in Kennesaw. Crime dropped after the ordinance and the city has maintained an exceptionally low crime rate ever since, even with the population swelling from 5,000 in 1982 to approximately 30,000 today. The truth is crime has plummeted and population has soared.{emphasis added}

In comparison, the population of Morton Grove, Illinois has dropped slightly and the crime rate has increased, especially right after the ban.

Putting a ban on owning a firearm may keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens but will it put them at a disadvantage when it comes to protecting their families and possessions? Criminals who do not abide by laws anyway, will still possess handguns. If you were a criminal planning on breaking into a home to steal or cause somebody harm, would you choose a home in a city where every homeowner is required to carry a gun and ammunition or a home in a city where homeowners are banned from carrying guns?

I am a gun owner but NOT an NRA member who can fully agree with the following:

"As an NRA Member who doesn't own more than one gun, I still think that we can have a reasonable restriction on the ownership of AR-15, AK-47, etc.More stringent requirements for ownership, registering them with the FBI are ideas that most people would support.

Typical hand guns (with limited magazines) and rifles should not be included in this argument. "

Webster666 saidPoliticians create a task force to study the problem, to make it look as if they intend to take action, which they do not.

Senator Feinstein will introduce legislation for a ban on assault weapons, which may or may not pass in the Senate. If it does pass in the Senate, it will surely be struck down in the House of Representatives. End of story, again...

My stance on gun control ?

---Make gun ownership a privilege, not a right, similar to a drivers license---Much more extensive background checks for people applying for a gun permit, and/or purchasing a gun---Only allow guns that hold no more than 2 bullets---Mandatory trigger locks---Mandatory that guns be locked away in a steel cabinet---Mandatory that ammo be locked away in a separate steel cabinet

To address some of these:

---Make gun ownership a privilege, not a right, similar to a drivers license

Would require repeal of the 2nd amendment, a process that would require 3/4 of the states to agree. Not going to happen. Additonally, making it easy to disregard the 2nd sets a bad precedent. It becomes easier to restrict 1st amendment and 4th amendment rights. The BOR becomes "more a set of guidelines rather than actual rules," borrowing a phrase from a popular movie.

---Much more extensive background checks for people applying for a gun permit, and/or purchasing a gun

A good idea - would require that mental health records be opened up and shared with the BATFE for the background checks. Would raise medical privacy concerns.

---Only allow guns that hold no more than 2 bullets

Virtually every handgun manufactured since the mid 1800s holds more that two cartridges. This would be a defacto handgun ban.

---Mandatory trigger locks

Trigger locks are included with every handgun currently sold -- federal law. Getting people to use them is the key.

---Mandatory that guns be locked away in a steel cabinetConnecticut has a safe storage law that requries safe storage if a minor under 16 resides in the household. This could be expanded to include persons who are mentally incapacitated or otherwise ineligible to use a gun.

---Mandatory that ammo be locked away in a separate steel cabinetProbably ineffective. A person who can break into a safe to get a gun probably wouldn't find it hard to get into a locked steel cabinet.

Who needs a task force when it's clear as daylight (at least to foreigners) what the problem is? Which is exactly the reason why nothing will come of this, until we have a moment like the Australians did.

q1w2e3 saidWho needs a task force when it's clear as daylight (at least to foreigners) what the problem is? Which is exactly the reason why nothing will come of this, until we have a moment like the Australians did.